The author questions the justice of the adversarial system for juveniles. He does not see evidence of greater protection of civil rights in the U.S. juvenile justice system but rather greater injustices caused by delays and detention. He further indicates that many juvenile defendants may be better served by having an experienced prosecutor acting alone rather than a defense lawyer. Another assumption regarding the juvenile justice system is that judges must be kept ignorant of background information until a youth is found guilty. French judges consider this assumption to be totally unrealistic. For example, the juvenile who has run away from home to avoid abuse may steal food, and French judges believe circumstances surrounding the offense directly influence the issue of guilt. The French juvenile justice system also clearly distinguishes between punishment and helping. The author concludes that legalistic trends in the United States may not be appropriate for juveniles, since more juveniles are being processed with more delays and a greater emphasis on punishment. Furthermore, some prosecutors and defense lawyers are not familiar with family courts and perform in a ritualistic way, and judges are frequently isolated from the people and information which might lead to more intelligent decisions. The clearly paternalistic system in France assumes the intelligent application of resources by responsible people who can play different roles and is clearly a more humane system where juveniles are listened to and expected to be actively involved in decisions regarding their future.